(original) (raw)
On 5/29/06, Bob Ippolito <bob@redivi.com> wrote:
I don't know about the rest of 'us', but that's what I want, yes: backward compatibility, and a warning to tell people to fix their code 'or else'. The prevalence of the warnings (outside of the stdlib) should give us a clue whether to make it an exception in 2.6 or wait for 2.7/3.0.
A compromise is to do proper range checking as a warning, and do the modulo math anyway... but is that what we really want?
I don't know about the rest of 'us', but that's what I want, yes: backward compatibility, and a warning to tell people to fix their code 'or else'. The prevalence of the warnings (outside of the stdlib) should give us a clue whether to make it an exception in 2.6 or wait for 2.7/3.0.
Perhaps more people could chime in? Am I being too anal about backward compatibility here?
--
Thomas Wouters <thomas@python.org >
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!